MMOs have always been my favorite genre of games; expansive worlds, swarms of people, and constant renovation of the game all create an experience that is unlike anything that can be found in a single-player game. Can all games be turned into MMOs? No. However, there are some games that really lend themselves to the genre. So, I thought of five games that should be turned into MMOs.

5. Bioshock

Bioshock has created a huge and expansive world, and with the multiple-universe plot twists that were implemented in Bioshock Infinite, could there be a universe where Andrew Ryan or Comstock’s plan came to fruition? Allowing for the game to come out of the water, or down from the air, and onto the natural world, it could allow for some interesting ideas. Keep the first person style; keep most of the controls (allow for easier switching between Vigors [Plasmids], and guns); keep the atmosphere. Throw in a larger open-world, but maybe throw time travel into the mix and make Columbia and Rapture raid-type encounters.

It would be awesome if it allowed players to pick a faction to join. Maybe in one universe Comstock and Andrew Ryan both exist at the same time, and you the player has to pick a side, or maybe there’s an underground resistance faction. Who knows, the possibilities are endless! I love this franchise and I think a well executed MMO, could really flesh out its lore even more, and make for some really interesting gameplay experiences.

4. inFAMOUS

The Ray Sphere goes off and a bunch of people begin to come into their dormant powers. I want to be one of them! Sure DC Universe Online is your typical superhero MMO, but inFAMOUS could give a totally different twist on the genre. The idea about inFamous that I like the most is that the people who have these superhuman powers were once just your average people. They have fallacies, and they’re easy to identify with. DCUO tried to mix this idea into its game, but I think inFAMOUS could pull this off with a little more finesse and style.

As far as gameplay goes, I would have everyone pick one main power, and then one power that they minor in, think along the lines of Final Fantasy XI main/sub job system. This would allow for some creative combinations of powers, and would give everyone an unique playstyle. This would also force the developers to flesh out the already existing powers and to provide some new ones for further variation, which would be absolutely amazing.

3. Borderlands

Borderlands is basically already an MMO, it’s just missing all the people running around. Buy a few servers, load Borderlands 1 and 2 maps onto it, and just let people go crazy. It’s boggling that this hasn’t already become an MMO because I’m sure it would be incredibly well received on the new consoles.

2. Kingdom Hearts

How awesome would this be? Imagine a Kingdom Hearts game where you are the protagonist and you get to wield your personal designed Keyblade. In the events before Kingdom Hearts: Birth By Sleep, there was “The Great Keyblade War” where thousands of Keyblade Warriors battled for the Xblade. If that many Keyblade Warriors once existed why can’t they again? With each iteration of the franchise, more and more Keyblades are presenting themselves, so why can’t there be thousands of Keyblades sometime in the future?

I could see this game functioning like the original Guild Wars where there were city hubs, where all the players could gather and trade items, but they would be required to split into small groups to participate in instanced dungeons. I would keep the classic Kingdom Hearts battle system, just instead of Donald and Goofy by your side, there would be other Keyblade Warriors. This could also be an amazing action PvP MMO; maybe the Keyblade Warriors have to train in arenas against one another. How cool would that be? Throw some Disney into the mix, and you’ve got a winning recipe for a fantastic MMO.

1. Pokémon

We all saw this one coming, as it is probably the most vocalized by the fan base for an MMO iteration. One could argue that the games have been inching their way towards this idea for some time. With each new installment of the franchise, the accessibility of trainer-to-trainer interaction has become easier and easier. Ten years ago, to battle against or to trade with another person you not only needed a friend with the game (or just a friend in general), you also needed a link cable. Now battling and trading is only gated by a quick button push and a file save.

Imagine an open world Pokémon game, that allowed for all trainers to connect to a server and play together. A good addition might be a battle timer, something akin to Final Fantasy X-2 that way decisions would have to be made a little quicker when battling against other people. Aside from that, Pokémon has always been an innovative franchise and they have yet to steer their fanbase wrong, so I assume that if a Pokémon MMO could be made, and made correctly, Game Freak are the guys to do it.

So what do you guys think? Do you agree? Do you disagree? Be sure to leave some feedback in the comment section below!

Mike Morrissette is one of MONG’s Editors. He also has an unhealthy obsession with The Green Lantern and anything involving Nutella. You can follow him on twitter, or friend him on PSN at HaughtyPride.

Recently there was an article posted on IGN that explained when (if ever) there would be a gay protagonist in a AAA game, with a few statements from game writers of various studios. The article can be seen here. It's almost a little troubling when one thinks about it, there really haven't been any gay characters in video games that were introduced as such from the get-go. Often times after the game has been released, we get little nods explaining that perhaps character X was gay, as though the writers were afraid to really put this out in the open until after the game had been a success. Why does this happen? In fact, what are some of the arguments that people bring to the table when they argue if it is appropriate to have a gay character in a video game?

'It Has To Be Important To The Story'

The most recent example is The Last of Us, and the character Ellie. In the main scenario of the game, Ellie's sexuality is never truly brought into the light. Is she gay or is she straight? Does it matter to the story? This is one argument that I see popping up quite often. Does the sexuality of a character matter to the story? In essence, this question is asking whether or not the sexuality of the character affects them directly or not. I absolutely detest this question, because being gay does matter, it always matters. Being gay directly affects a large majority of events in one's life. Especially when one is to consider the act of "coming out". Coming out can arguably be the most difficult thing any gay person has ever done, thus it affects their personality and their outlook on life traumatically. So being gay is always going to be relevant to the story, because one's personality, choices in life, and world views can be extremely relevant to their sexuality. Being "gay" is so much more than a sexual preference, and to deny that would be to deny gay culture, and deny that gay culture affects each gay person in varying degrees.

I'm willing to give The Last of Us a little break. Ellie was born into a world that is nothing like our own. She doesn't know gay culture, or anything of the sort. Though, I'm certain Ellie knows what sex is, and before the main scenario happens, she clearly has a gay encounter. She must also know that the majority of people have sex with those of the opposite gender. Even if there is an apocalyptic event happening, she must know that she is different. I should preface, I'm not advocating for Ellie to wear a sign saying "I'm a lesbian" and to proclaim such a statement every three seconds, but it would have been nice for her to have reflected on her relationship with Riley as I'm sure that was a pivotal point in her life.

'It Has To Be A Choice'

He could have been so much more bad ass if they had openly acknowledged that he was bi-sexual

Should sexual preference in games always be a choice? No. Actually, I might argue that games such as Skyrim, Mass Effect, and Dragon Age have run counter to what they were trying to accomplish by involving the option to be gay in the game. The problem is that of the option. In essence, these games are perpetuating the idea that being gay is a choice, and that one always has the freedom to opt to be straight instead. I strongly appreciate what these game were trying to do, because it is a step in the right direction. I do understand however that these games are under the sand box genre, thus it's up to the player to create whatever kind of character they wish. However, not all games fall under the sand box umbrella, and as it stands right it now, it seems that having the choice to be gay or not is the only acceptable option, it's almost a "separate but equal" mentality, and that is a severe offense.

'There Shouldn't Be A Gay Character In Every Video Game'

Some of these characters have a little secret that they're not sharing

This statement almost makes a really good point, if it changed "there shouldn't be a gay character in every video game" to "there shouldn't be a blatantly gay character in every video game", then I might not have had a problem with this statement. It would get rather annoying if in every video game there was a part that focused on a character coming out. Why would it get annoying? Because it would be repetitive, not because of the subject matter. The other problem with the first statement is that there are gay people everywhere. If we follow the widely accepted statistic that 1 out of every 10 people fall more-so on the gay side of the continuum of sexuality, then if a video game would ever have a cast of more than 10 and assuming the characters follow human norms (IE They aren't asexual aliens), then it would be safe to assume that at least one of the characters is probably a little on the queer side. Does this fact always have to be brought up in the game? No. It does not, but it also should not be assumed that every character in the game is straight, this should be relevant in the both developer's and the player's mind.

'I Won't Play Because I Can't Relate To A Gay Character'

Because relating to a yellow circle that eats white orbs while being chased by ghosts is so easy to relate to, yeah?

This is almost a perfect statement, if it read, "I can't relate to a character's gay aspect" then we would be in perfect shape. Can a straight person relate to what it is like to be gay? No. They cannot, and arguably shouldn't try, but acknowledging this fact is perfect. Though, to say that you wont play a game because you can't relate to a character that is gay, assumes that being gay is all that that character is. A well developed character will be relatable on multiple levels. I'm a white gay male, but I can still relate to Lara Croft in Tomb Raider, because she is so much more than just a woman. Just like I find myself relating to non-gay characters all the time as well. A good, well-rounded character should be easy to relate to, no matter who it is that is playing the game or what innate traits the character might have.

Okay, so a few end notes just to summarize everything.

Acknowledge that being gay is an important part of one's life.

Acknowledge that being gay is not the only personality trait of a person who is gay.

Acknowledge that there are people who are gay everywhere.

Acknowledge that being gay is not a choice.

Keeping these four things in-mind, hopefully we can start to see some more LGBTQA-Friendly video game characters.